The Uncomfortable Truth: What to Do When You Truly Dislike Someone on Your Team
- Terry Cullen
- Oct 10
- 9 min read
The Leadership Playbook is your go-to guide for practical, actionable insights. Our quick reads are designed to get you into action right away.
The image of a perfect leader is one of unflappable charisma, universal goodwill, and effortless rapport. We imagine a team of highly functioning individuals, all bound by mutual respect and a singular vision. Yet, the reality of leadership is often far messier. It involves navigating budgets, deadlines, and—most complex of all—human emotion.
Every leader, regardless of their skill or experience, will eventually face a deeply uncomfortable truth: you have someone on your team whom you fundamentally dislike.
This isn't a performance-based conflict, a disagreement over strategy, or a personality clash that can be smoothed over with a happy hour. This is a deep, often irrational, subjective aversion—a clash of values, communication styles, or mere presence that triggers a visceral negative reaction.
The taboo nature of this feeling is what makes it so dangerous. Leaders fear admitting personal dislike because it feels unprofessional, petty, or biased. However, ignoring this emotional reality does not make it disappear; it simply forces it underground, where it poisons your decision-making, weakens your objectivity, and ultimately compromises the entire team's mission.
Managing personal dislike is not about forcing a friendship. It is one of the most demanding tests of a leader's discipline, requiring immense self-awareness, objective rigor, and a commitment to professionalism that transcends emotion. It forces you to lead with your head and your values, not just your gut.
The Anatomy of Dislike: Distinguishing Emotion from Execution
Before any action can be taken, a leader must engage in radical self-auditing. We must cleanly separate personal feelings from professional reality.
1. Dislike vs. Performance
The first critical step is to ask: Is my dislike based on objective, measurable performance issues, or is it purely subjective emotional aversion?
Subjective Dislike: This stems from traits like communication style (e.g., they talk too much, they're too quiet), differing political or social values, personal habits, or simply a lack of chemistry. These issues do not inherently affect job delivery, but they severely strain your patience and perception.
Objective Performance: This stems from measurable failures, such as missed deadlines, poor-quality output, failure to follow protocols, or disruptive behavior that tangibly affects team results.
If the problem is purely subjective, your strategy must focus solely on self-management and boundary-setting. If the problem is performance-based, your strategy must focus on objective discipline and formal processes. An influential leader understands that emotional dislike often creates a confirmation bias, leading them to unfairly amplify minor objective performance flaws in the person they already dislike.
2. The Roots of Aversion
Dislike often springs from one of three sources, which the leader must identify to neutralize its power:
The Mirror Effect: We often dislike in others the traits we secretly dislike or fear in ourselves (e.g., someone is too loud, and we fear we are too quiet). This is a moment for introspection, not management action.
The Value Gap: The individual's primary values (e.g., speed, independence) directly conflict with the leader's core values (e.g., thoroughness, collaboration). This conflict creates constant friction, even if both people are technically performing their jobs.
The Style Barrier: The employee's personality or communication style (e.g., overly enthusiastic, overly dry, overly cynical) actively depletes the leader's emotional energy, making interaction a psychological tax.
Recognizing the root of the aversion is the key to preventing it from hijacking your leadership.
The Two Pillars of Management Discipline
When managing someone you dislike, your response must be built on two non-negotiable pillars of disciplined leadership.
Pillar 1: The Internal Discipline of Self-Management
The ethical burden falls entirely on the leader. You are the professional responsible for the team's climate and mission success. Your feelings are irrelevant to that goal.
A. Establish Radical Self-Awareness
Before any interaction, pause and check your emotional baseline. Ask: "Am I reacting to this person's action (what they did) or their identity (who they are)?" If you can't cleanly distinguish the two, you must defer important decisions. This practice prevents the leader from allowing their bias to create an unfair environment.
B. The Behavior-Only Rule
During every professional exchange, rigorously filter your language to focus exclusively on measurable behavior and objective impact. Never critique personality or intent. For instance, instead of thinking, "I hate how defensive they are," the feedback must be: "When you interrupted the client, the project timeline was compromised." This objectivity protects you from litigation and, more importantly, protects your ethical standing (Goleman, 1995).
C. Professional Distance and Boundaries
When dislike is present, it is often wise to limit exposure to only what is professionally necessary. This isn't avoidance; it's self-preservation to ensure fairness.
Minimize informal contact (casual lunches, water-cooler chat).
Structure meetings with clear agendas and time limits.
Document decisions and agreements in writing to remove any ambiguity that subjective feelings might create.
Pillar 2: The External Rigor of Performance Management
The mission must always be the leader's focus. The most effective way to neutralize personal dislike is to elevate the objective standards that govern everyone.
A. Hyper-Clarity on Expectations
If you dislike someone, you are likely scrutinizing their work more closely. To ensure this scrutiny is fair, the performance bar must be transparent and clear, and applicable to everyone. Use written, measurable Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and expectations. When you judge their work, you are not judging them; you are judging their work against a universally known standard.
B. The Documentation Buffer
If you are managing someone you dislike, you must assume every interaction could be viewed by a neutral third party (HR, a review board, etc.). Document everything: meeting summaries, decisions, performance reviews, and especially any formal feedback. This documentation acts as an objective buffer, proving that your actions are based on performance metrics, not personal bias.
C. The Recalibration of the Role
If the personality clash is truly hindering team output, explore modifying the employee's role or responsibilities. Can they focus on tasks that minimize interaction with you and other friction points? This strategic move focuses on optimizing the team's output rather than demanding a change in their personality.
Leadership Archetype Spotlight: Blending Responses for Balance
An influential and effective leader is a blend of all 12 leadership archetypes*. When facing the challenge of managing personal dislike, a leader cannot rely on just one facet of their identity. The response must reflect a balanced and measured combination of traits to ensure fairness, stability, and mission focus.
*Find out what your dominant leadership archetypes are with im4u.world’s Leadership Compass. It’s a free and confidential self-assessment tool and you can gain insights in minutes.
The disciplined response to managing a disliked team member requires the combined wisdom of at least five archetypes:
1. The Ethical Decision Maker (The Moral Compass)
The Ethical Decision Maker provides the indispensable foundation: unwavering commitment to fairness. This archetype forces the leader to ask: “Is this action fair, objective, and aligned with our organizational values, regardless of how I feel?” They prevent the leader from using their authority to punish or sideline a person based on subjective bias. This integrity is the ultimate shield against prejudice.
2. The Anchor (The Emotional Regulator)
The Anchor provides the necessary stability and emotional control. When dislike is high, the Anchor steps in to regulate the leader's internal state. This archetype helps the leader maintain professional boundaries, avoid knee-jerk emotional reactions, and remain consistent. The Anchor ensures the leader remains predictable, calm, and trustworthy, even amid friction.
3. The Cultivator (The Empathy Bridge)
The Cultivator may seem contradictory, but their role is crucial: to find a single point of human connection. The Cultivator encourages the leader to understand the employee's motivation, even if their style is grating. This isn't about becoming friends; it's about seeing the person as a whole, valued contributor. By finding one area of genuine competence or shared purpose, the Cultivator transforms the employee from a source of aversion into a limited, functional resource.
4. The Communicator (The Clarity Broker)
The Communicator ensures that any required conversation is clean, precise, and non-aggressive. When delivering feedback to someone you dislike, your tone can easily become strained or passive-aggressive. The Communicator insists on using objective language, focusing only on the performance gap, and ensuring the message is received without emotional static. Clarity is kindness in this situation.
5. The Strategist (The Mission Focus)
The Strategist provides the essential external reference point: the mission. This archetype allows the leader to detach personal feelings from professional necessity. The Strategist constantly reminds the leader that the employee's value stems solely from their contribution to the overall goal. By focusing ruthlessly on the strategic plan, the leader can bypass personal aversion and treat the team member as a piece of the necessary organizational machinery.
By blending the Ethical Decision Maker's integrity, the Anchor's composure, the Cultivator's attempt at understanding, the Communicator's precision, and the Strategist’s focus, the leader builds a measured, objective, and fair response that protects the team climate and the organizational mission from the corrosive influence of personal bias.
The Path Forward: A Four-Step Action Plan
When you realize you intensely dislike a team member, do not wait for the feeling to subside. Take immediate, disciplined action using the following four steps.
Step 1: The Three-Minute Rule (Internal Reset)
The moment the person frustrates you or triggers your dislike, do not speak. Use a three-minute internal pause. During this time, physically move away or silently repeat a mantra: “Focus on the action, not the person. Focus on the mission, not the emotion.” This simple act of separation activates the Anchor archetype, forcing the emotional regulator in your brain to take over before the Communicator speaks. This is your insurance policy against a biased response.
Step 2: The Shared Mission Bridge (Re-Framing the Relationship)
Find one high-stakes project or objective that requires the specific, unique skill of the disliked team member. Frame all future necessary interactions around this shared mission. This is the Strategic and Cultivator approach working together. By elevating the goal above the personal, you provide a clear, professional purpose for interaction. You are collaborating on the mission, not on friendship. This creates a bridge of necessity, making the dislike feel less relevant (Sinek, 2017).
Step 3: The Structured Review (Objective Measurement)
If performance issues compound your subjective dislike, initiate a formal, structured performance improvement plan (PIP). The PIP structure, guided by the Ethical Decision Maker, must be entirely metric-based. This is not disciplinary; it is a mechanism for clarity. The leader cannot allow their feelings to influence the process. The review should be conducted by the book, using documented facts and measurable deadlines. This process leads to one of two fair outcomes: either the performance improves to meet the standard, or the objective documentation justifies the necessary separation.
Step 4: The Transition Plan (Protecting the Future)
If, despite your best efforts, the personal friction continues to degrade the team environment or your ability to lead objectively, a transition plan must be established. This is the Executive and Negotiator archetypes working together. The transition can take several forms:
Reassignment: Moving the employee to a different team or reporting structure to remove the personality conflict.
Role Change: Adjusting their core duties to focus solely on independent work that requires minimal team interaction.
Formal Separation: If performance standards are not met after the Structured Review (Step 3), the objective documentation justifies a fair and professional exit, demonstrating that the action was about the role, not about dislike.
Disliking someone is not a moral failing; failing to manage that dislike and allowing it to compromise your leadership is. The ability to manage a team member you dislike is, perhaps, the ultimate demonstration of your professional maturity.
Your Journey to Integrated Leadership
The best leaders do not choose between personal aversion and professional duty. They understand that a leadership system driven by emotion is biased, and a disciplined focus without self-awareness is tyranny. The real work of leadership is learning to use your self-control to create an environment that is both disciplined and deeply human.
Your unique leadership identity is your key to this balance. By understanding your top archetypes, you can embrace your natural inclination—whether it's towards the Anchor's stability or the Cultivator's empathy—and consciously work to strengthen the others.
This is not about changing who you are; it's about becoming a more complete version of yourself.
Your journey to integrated leadership begins with self-awareness.
im4u.world offers practical and affordable leadership courses.
Ready to strengthen your ethical foundation and navigate any professional landscape with confidence and purpose? Here are two actions you can take right away:
Take the im4u.world Leadership Compass. It’s a self-assessment that helps you understand your strengths and development needs.
Explore our courses designed to nurture your leadership potential. For example, our Ethical Decision Maker course is designed to equip you with these essential tools. You'll find our courses are practical and affordable.
Now, it's your turn. What's your biggest leadership dilemma: managing personal dislike without bias, or something else entirely?
References
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. Bantam Books.
Sinek, S. (2017). Leaders Eat Last: Why Some Teams Pull Together and Others Don't. Portfolio/Penguin.
#LeadershipPlaybook #EthicalLeadership #TeamManagement #WorkplaceConflict #ProfessionalBoundaries #EmotionalIntelligence #LeadWithIntegrity #im4uworld
GLH-LP-101025
Comments